tv Your World With Neil Cavuto FOX News January 28, 2016 1:00pm-2:01pm PST
just about four hours now -- three hours from the big debate. we'll be here for that as well. they start at 7:00 eastern. the dow is giving us a nice day as well. it's all good. we're glad you're with us. "your world" starts right now. what's up with this thing? >> are you -- >> i am -- this is -- you talk about negative stuff, really? based on what? >> i don't know. >> based on david brock's long history of honesty and integrity? the man who tried to destroy anita hill, is this where this is coming from? >> all this time you've been focusing on the republicans, feel the bern, everybody. welcome, i'm neil cavuto and you are looking at a world of anger on the part right now technically of the democratic front-runner, bernie sanders, attacking those who are questioning his integrity and with the not so valed reference, suspecting it might be coming from the hillary clinton campaign.
let's get ready to rumble, not at the debate tonight, within the democratic party right now. ed henry in newton, iowa with the latest. what's going on here? >> reporter: i think you said it perfectly which is that bernie sanders for all intents and purposes is acting at least like the democratic front-runner now. hillary clinton has been the front-runner from day one, but all of a sudden bernie sanders is drawing larger crowds here in iowa than hillary clinton. all of a sudden he's talking tough about winning these caucuses on monday, adding the caveat that there has to be a large turnout. but something that had not been contemplated at the beginning of this race, namely that he could potentially win iowa and new hampshire, that's changed now. and what also has changed is that the clinton campaign at the beginning barely even acknowledged that bernie sanders was in this race. what clip you just played and we'll play a little more in a second shows is that bernie sanders may be the front-runner now, at least it's a dead heat here in iowa, is taking more fire from the clinton camp and he's giving it back.
this time it was about rumors circulated around the state that maybe bernie sanders recruiting people, college students from other states to come in monday on buses and vote in these caulk kuks, show up in caucus monday night even if they're not eligible to caucus, something bernie sanders got very exercised about at a breakfast this morning. listen. >> every one of you knows, and you know it, that every day you're being flooded by all this negative stuff from secretary clinton's super pac. that's the first time you've ever heard of it. i don't want my integrity and honesty to be impugned. i have no idea who says this. this is a lie, san absolute lie. >> reporter: you hear his side of it. the bottom line of it, the clinton camp, double digit lead for bernie sanders. where she's doing well would be south carolina which will be the fourth state that will vote after nevada.
she's got a huge lead there in large part because of african-american support. the question is whether or not she gets there or whether bernie sanders has momentum. what hillary clinton has been doing the last 24 hours, last night raising money in philadelphia, not here in iowa. then stayed overnight in the east. she was raising money in new york city today. tells us two things. one, bernie sanders is raising a lot more money than anyone expected, he's got more tv ads in iowa than hillary clinton. she's got to catch up. number two, not being in the state for a large chunk of time right before the caucuses could be risky for hillary clinton. >> thank you. now to john roberts on another problem that has at least bernie about burning and that is the fact that micro soft will play such an important role in counting the votes. you're probably saying what's the big deal. there are a lot of microsoft folks who are big backers of hillary clinton.
what's going on? >> reporter: bernie going boom on a number of front. he's not only taking aim at the clinton campaign today, he's taking aim at the iowa democratic party. the reason why, to report the results of the caucuses in 2016 the democratic party -- republican party for that matter as well are going to be relying on a new app, an app that was developed in conjunction with microsoft. what's bernie upset about? microsoft employees for hillary clinton's failed 2008 presidential bid gave a total of $200,000. sanders and his campaign are worried that because microsoft has been friendly to hillary clinton in the past during her presidential campaign, maybe they'll be friendly to her as those results are recorded on caucus night. i've talked to democratic officials about this and did a big story on the republican app again designed by microsoft. there's a lot of checks and balance here and i'm not sure that bernie sanders' concerns are that legitimate. one of the big reasons is that when the democrats caucus, unlike the republicans who have a secret ballot, the democrats do it in the open. they gather in groups.
if you're for bernie sanders you're in this group, hillary clinton you're in this group. if you're for martin o'malley you're in this group. everybody sees who's supporting who, the tallies are taken, it's written down. then they go to the app and report it back. there's checks and balances in the app that say are you sure these numbers are correct, are they outside of the expected norms and those all go back to a program at the democrat or g.o.p. headquarters for everybody to see. it would be very difficult for any fraud to creep into the system, particularly since it's all backed up on paper and bernie sanders will have precinct captains at the 1,631 precincts observing the process. both the democratic party and the republican party have run tests of the app and say it's come through with flying colors but i guess when you're bernie sanders and you know that microsoft employees have given money, you're a little suspicious. >> you pointed out something crucial here.
as long as there's a printout of that, it's one thing to go to the internet and you never see a hard copy, that's when the gremlins can come in. >> it all goes down on paper but it's shown to the precinct captains for the individual campaigns. they have to sign off on it before it's transmitted. i think there probably be a lot of backups and redundant systems that will ensure that the results are as accurate as they can be and that paper record starts coming in about 24 hours after the caucuses take place. >> you think about the last thing a company like microsoft needs is anything that questions that. thank you, john, very much. you know a lot of the polls that go into this race that show iowa could be a tossup for the democrats right now, that would be a shocker if bernie sanders actually finishes out ahead in iowa, wins that state. he's heavily favored to win new hampshire. he's a vermont senator so there
does seem to be a feeling that new hampshire voters would be inclined fo support him. hillary clinton was hoping it would be a one-one draw after the crucial contest. the republicans are bunched up tight. donald trump has been leading in a lot of polls but ted cruz hopes to win the evangelical states. a lot of the support, including jerry falwell jr. and sarah palin, particularly in the iowa evangelical community are coming out for trump. that would be ironic there if ted cruz were to lose to donald trump in iowa. all the more so if, as planned, donald trump skips the debate tonight. here to sort it all out, byron york in des moines. byron, i would think that if you're bernie sanders and you're
looking at the distinct possibility you could beat hillary clinton in iowa after barack obama did the same to her 8 years ago, and unlike what she was able to pull off and bounce back and win in new hampshire, much harder to do against bernie sanders this go around, i know she has an incredible organization but that's a tough deficit to come back from. >> reporter: no kidding. in the latest real clear politics average much po of polls here in iowa, hillary clinton leads bernie sanders by two-tenths of one percentage point. it's totally even. look at the four or five most recent polls, he wins in a couple, she wins in a couple. they're very, very close. when you talk to the sanders people they don't say when we win iowa but they say when we do well here and then we do really well and win new hampshire, they think that will completely change the dynamic of the race. >> we were talking before and john roberts were explaining how microsoft is going to attempt to tally this or at least bring this into the modern digital age
which could have drawbacks, in that event and polls are so -- >> what? >> polls are inexpeact here, wh do you envision happening? how is this counting going to go? what do you forecast? >> reporter: you know, the iowa caucuses i've been to, you sit around, a few people speaking on behalf of this or that candidate get up and then in a lot of these caucuses they've taken sheets of paper and torn them into little squares and pass them around and you write who you vote for and then they pass a basket like in church and you put it in. then they count it up and they phone it in to the central headquarters. we're talking really low tech with the exception of the telephone. obviously they had a huge problem on the republican side last time where they actually declared the wrong guy the
winner saying that mitt romney won. no way they should have called that. a recount showed that rick santorum won by 34. the bottom line is it's really low tech and i doubt it's somehow going to do a hand sprung into the 21st century by monday. >> byron, expectations are one thing but if you do have the oddity of bernie sanders winning iowa, you do have the oddity of donald trump, he wins iowa, tell me where this race goes. >> reporter: well, it goes to new hampshire where those two men, sanders and trump, have significant leads in new hampshire. and so you have to think that a trump victory here in iowa would really lead to increased momentum and he's up well into the double digits in new hampshire. so is bernie sanders. so i do think it changes the dynamic of the race. in the democratic side, on the
democratic side, hillary clinton has always been saying just wait a minute, wait until we get to south carolina, wait until we get to the sec states where african-american democrats start voting because they are such a huge and critical part of the democratic coalition. but on the republican side, you win iowa, you win new hampshire, just try to find somebody who's done both of those things and not gone on and won the nomination. >> good stuff. byron york, thank you very much, in des moines. >> thank you. tonight's fox debate, we're less than three hours away from the kickoff debate and then of course the primetime event that will this time not be featuring donald trump but the focus certainly seems to be on the other candidates who feel that they're going to have ample time to take advantage of that increased oxygen in the room. we have a lot more on that. this might come up as well, these volatile markets. i can tell you that i've give rn bret baier some questions. i don't know if he's going to use them. knowing him as i do, i have a
feeling. we're up 125 points today. a lot has to do with at least confidence in some of the earnings news, not all. facebook for example wildly beat street estimates, that stock soaring today. it has made all of its stockholders a lot richer but the facebook market value itself at $41 billion, guess who has about a $6.2 billion chunk of that? mark zuckerberg. and to think that that entire company started as a quest to find dates. is this a great country or what? we have a lot more coming up including these arrests at disney land paris, two guys with a gun and a koran, that doesn't sound good. the former secretary of the united states donald rumsfeld on that and a novel undertaking he's just started. i don't know if i'm going to call him a zuckerberg type but maybe. after this.
why you couldn't be healthy but one really good reason, that's our family. that's the beauty of working at gnc, we've got something for everybody. we're here for you. just ask. we make it simple. gnc. what is it about paris? you probably heard by now that a guy harass arrewas arrested in paris packing two guns and a koran, only days after we got word of a man captured in milwaukee who had intended to kill a lot of people there in a paris-like attack. with us now to remind us as if we needed reminding that terrorism is everywhere, the former secretary of defense, donald rumsfeld. good to have you. >> thank you so much. good to be with you, neil. >> what do you make of the paris development again and the focus
that would seem to be still on paris, the city that's had more than its share of targeting? >> well, i think it's one more sign of the times. we're living in a period where there are a large number of people in the world who are radical islamists who are determined to kill people, innocent men, women and children, and i think we'll be living with this for some period of time. >> i've been raising this with generals both retired and present, secretary, about whether we're too late to try to attack isis or whatever combined entity is forming in the middle east because the cells are everywhere here, whether they be in milwaukee, even with those who are onto the mentality or certainly in paris and these other cities, around the world, how do you fight that? >> first of all, you have to identify it and label it as to what it is. it's a strain within that faith
that's radical and determined to impose its will on others and to actually to attack the concept of the nation state that has been a source of reasonable stability in the world throughout certainly my lifetime and before. i think that we have to recognize what it is. we have to recognize that it's not going to be won simply with bombs and bullets. it's going to take people active in that faith who are against that strain within their faith actively pursuing their people to persuade them that it's a bad thing to do. instead of training people to go out and kill people, we need to train them to be productive citizens in the world. >> that isn't happening right now and the president refuses to use some of the terms that i think you were advocating. it happens at a time right now where we're just more inclined to want to sit pat and try
whatever we're doing and run out the clock and then a new president comes in. what do you think of that? >> the reality is that a terrorist can attack at any time of the day or night in anyplace using any technique, and it's physically impossible to defend everywhere at every moment of the day or night against every conceivable technique. therefore, there's an enormous advantage by the attacker and a very difficult task for the defender. therefore, what we have to do is find ways to slow down their recruiting and to squeeze off their financing. and that is going to take a large coalition and a lot of leadership and it will take something more than the vacuum that's been -- leadership vacuum that's been created in the world because that vacuum is being filled with people who don't have our values and don't have our interests. >> if i could switch gears here,
secretary, because i heard about this and i immediately told my staff, we got to book him. now, you heard about facebook. i'm thinking you're maybe our modern mark zuckerberg here because you've gone into -- >> come on! >> you've gone into the high tech app business. you have, i think, the first or second most downloaded app right now. it's a solitaire game but it has to do with winston churchill. explain. >> well, when i was ambassador to n.a.t.o. in 1973, i became friendly with a very senior belgian diplomat, and that individual had learned this game from winston churchill during world war ii when the belgian government was in exile out of belgium because the nazis took over, and they were there and he became friendly with churchill. churchill taught him the game, he taught me the game, and it's such a fascinating game. it's complicated. it's challenging.
it requires strategy. you have to look two or three steps ahead. it's a lot of fun to play. and i've just been amazed at the number of people who have downloaded it. >> how is it an app and how did you even know what the heck an app was? >> well, i had to ask younger people who know more about that kind of thing. but you have to use miniature cards because -- you use ten stacks. back in my day you didn't have ipads or computers or anything like that. in fact, when i was young, we didn't even have television. >> don't start doing that thing and say, you know, i walked to school six miles both ways uphill. >> no, it's the truth. there was no such thing when i was growing up. >> now you're that guy. when is the first billion coming? >> come on. i'm giving every cent of profits that i make to military charities to support the troops and their families.
the churchill foundation is giving their money to the legacy of winston churchill. >> very good. i'll be watching. >> hope everyone downloads it. >> now i know donald rumsfeld, there's an app for him, or that. after this. h to retirement may not always be clear. but at t. rowe price, we can help guide your retirement savings. so wherever your
retirement journey takes you, we can help you reach your goals. call us or your advisor t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if
you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call now and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, it could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs. call now to request your free decision guide. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. [ male announcer ] you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and virtually no referrals needed.
times ♪ >> she said she will, she's been busy at concerts and all that, you know, star. >> if i picked up my phone and i hear adele sing hello, it's me, i'll take the call, you bet. >> well, we broke it first on fox business. the dustup with one, adele. only my favorite singer on the planet. apparently folks in the adele group i'm assuming not adele herself none too pleased with governor huckabee using that song, hello, as part of a campaign ad. sa tiricly done, good, tongue firmly in cheek. they were not pleased and wanted it to stop. governor huckabee isn't sure why it should stop. so it technically won't be stopped, which is causing a dustup now. i tried repeatedly to call adele myself because, well, she respects talent and i respect
talent. that's the way we roll. anyway, i did pick up the phone one time and she answered hello. hello. you're laughing. anyway, a lot of people are having fun with this but it is causing -- it wouldn't be the first singer, artist, to protest a candidate using his or her songs on the stump. remember bruce springsteen getting mad at chris christie, adele, saying this isn't happening. darling. anyway, reince priebus on this. he's asked to take a position. i don't care about the trump thing. the adele thing, where do you stand on this? >> neil, i was general counsel of the rnc before being chairman and the copyright stuff comes up i think every campaign so it's actually more common than people realize. it happens all the time. >> wait a minute. so you are saying governor huckabee has to stop doing this? >> no, i'm not.
i'm just saying these controversies over music and videos and campaign stops are very common. >> but this is adele. do you like adele? do you like her music? i love her music. >> i like her music. i don't think anyone -- i don't know too many people who don't like her music. i think it's more of a compliment that the governor wants to use her music and her song to make his case. >> that's what i was saying. she needs to sell albums. i mean, hello, here's a way to sell quite a few in iowa. >> right. >> if she's not going to listen to me, that's her business. >> right. >> let's talk about the debate. i know you got a lot of pressure on you tonight, yet another debate. i think this is an outstanding opportunity for the guys still there to focus on each other, to sort of stand out in the crowd, make a statement days before the caucuses. how does this, in your mind, change sort of the complexion of the debate and the race?
>> well, you know, look neil, i really don't know yet because it
hasn't happened but i agree with everything that you said in the setup. i think that it's going to be an opportunity for everyone else. there's fewer people on the stage, more time for every person that's there. i think the preliminary -- the first debate is going to be just as interesting. remember, we were breaking records in the first debate as well. so i think it's going to be a big night. i think there's going to be a lot of people watching and i expect it to be very important for the people in iowa as they make their final decisions going into caucus day next week. >> do you read any significance in the fact that this debate, for example, let's say in south carolina as the last go-round it might be a different matter but because it's in iowa days before the caucus vote that skipping out on this could be a problem, that some iowans who favor that
would be offended? >> i don't know about that, neil. i mean, we put out our calendar, the candidates are good with the calendar, but you know, every campaign -- some people need to realize, every campaign is going to make the decision that they need to make that either gives them the advantage or puts them in a better place. all these are calculations that campaigns make. when we put out the calendar though and i said it so many times it's engirained in my hea, i always said here are the debates that are on the calendar. you can compete if you want to. you don't have to. but if you do a debate not on the calendar, then you're not going to do any debates on the calendar. that's the one thing we put in place. candidates can decide how many debates they want to go to on their own. it really doesn't matter to me. >> well, you could change everything by playing adele's songs tonight but we'll see. watch bret closely. i've given him a couple money
supply questions. i'm throwing that out there so you can start mentioning a couple of economic stats. >> i'll let him know that you've inserted some debt trajectory questions. >> anything i can do. thank you very, very much. weighing in on the whole adele thing. i think governor huckabee is going to have to cease and desist. victory for adele. more after this.
♪ (cell phone rings) where are you? well the squirrels are back in the attic. mom? your dad won't call an exterminator... can i call you back, mom? he says it's personal this time... if you're a mom, you call at the worst time. it's what you do. if you want to save fifteen percent or more on car insurance, you switch to geico. it's what you do. where are you? it's very loud there. are you taking a zumba class?
two and a half hours away from the first debate, the candidates walk into the room and what's the first thing they say to the moderators? ♪ hello well, maybe not. but the big debate starting and this will be the big night and adele, oh, stop it, you crazy thing. we'll see what happens. but of course this is a big night, not the least of which is because adele was dragged into this because of mike huckabee doing a campaign ad featuring adele music and the campaign didn't realize that that's illegal and that adele's people got back and said oh, no you don't, even though i don't think
it's coming from adele but a bunch of lawyers around adele. it's not the adele that i know but enough about that. now onto something else that's even bigger. a certain candidate who's not participating but there's a split view in historically whether that's good or bad politically. ask richard nixon and his experience with john kennedy in 1960 what those debates did for him. not much. which is why in followup contests when nixon ran in 1968 and 1972 for re-election, he did not have debates. he skewed them entirely and did okay not doing debates. the man that's a definitive expert, evan thomas, author of the nixon. evan, what do you make that there's a risk being there, a split view of whether it helps or hurts. i know this is a different case, different time, different period in the campaign year. what do you think? >> i think nixon would think that trump is doing the right thing to take a risk here.
it is a risk because he's being accused of being a coward. i think nixon who refused to debate in 1968 and 1972 would say you got to stand up to the networks, even fox, although there was no fox in 1968, but nixon would get it and be your own guy and if you don't want to do it, don't do it. of course, nixon learned from painful experience by debating kennedy in '60 and losing badly, at least in the first debate and that may have colored his view. i think nixon would appreciate trump. nixon was a populist and understood how to get the populist votes. my guess is he would say trump is doing the right thing. >> it wasn't exactly lincoln douglas nixon and kennedy but in the last debate, their answers went on a long time, the questions were cogent, powerful, the answers long measured, reasoned.
it wouldn't survive today and that's the criticism of this process, fairly or not, big exception when fox does it, as you know, adam. see how i slipped that in there? it's a process that doesn't really advance a cause or any kind of cause. there are too many of them, too filtered. what do you think? >> actually, i don't really buy that. i think that voters are watching for the body language. they weren't watching the nixon/kennedy debate in 1960 for the substance. it was all kimmo and mats sue and names we've forgotten. kennedy was the challenger and nixon agreed to debate him because he thought kennedy was going to look like a preppy lightweight. >> i know what you're saying how it was ultimately scored and regarded and graded on that point but you know the stories that people who listen to the debates that nixon won but if you were to hear them back, watch them back, they seem
almost relic-like in that the answers were longer. i don't even know if that's possible today. what do you think? >> it's not. there was no twitter in 1960. there was no cable. there was no fox. it was a completely different age. i'm just saying that the voters haven't changed that much and they're always looking for the stuff about how whether somebody comes across as a man or a stand-up guy or stand-up woman as the case may be. that's what they care about more than the actual substance. yes, back in '60 they took a lot longer to give their answers and they were more substantive. they were. >> about the process that at this stage skipping one right on the eve of a big caucus, ronald reagan famously opted not to debate george bush sr. and he lost and regrouped and had the famous microphone moment.
do we assign it to missing the debate or the fact that he disregarded, didn't take george bush seriously so we're overplaying the debate thing even then? >> he recouped because he had that business about it's my microphone and it made bush look stupid. if he did lose, he immediately recouped it. you know, reagan, like trump, was a showman and knew how to put on a show and knew how to recover. everybody thought reagan was maybe not that smart, going to do that well in the debates. as i recall in 1980 with president carter, carter went after him in a late debate for being weak on social security and reagan said, well, there you go again and it was one of those great moments. >> and it was only one debate. they only had one debate. >> right. and reagan surprised. reagan may have seemed not that smart to some people, but obviously a great showman, understood tv, got tv, worked for him. >> well put.
being nixon is the book. evan thomas, the author. great to see you. thank you very much. >> thanks, neil. right now we're focusing on the big debate tonight but more importantly where the poll positions are right now. what if i told you that marco rubio is in the exact same poll position nowadays o days out of caucuses that rick santorum was in four years ago. rick santorum went on to win iowa. what happens now? after this. announcer: a horrific terror attack in paris. then, a brutal act of terror here at home. it's time
for a tested and proven leader who won't try to contain isis. kaux to destroy them. and keep america safe. jeb bush: the united states should not delay in leading a global coalition to take out isis with overwhelming force. announcer: tested and proven leadership matters. jeb bush. right to rise usa is responsible
cruz, although that varies. but do you know he's in the same statistical polling position that rick santorum was four years ago and rick santorum went on to win. it tells you polls can be wrong, they can be surprising. does history repeat itself thattthat we're so focused on trump and cruz. mark, what do you think? >> interesting comparison because rubio's number is so close to santorum's in 2012. it was very accurate for all candidates except for santorum who had an 8-point trump. santorum had a lock on the evangelical votes and rubio is appealing to an entirely different base of voters. santorum had evangelical endorsements. rubio's got endorsements from george pit tacky and former
senator john kyle, the des moines register. these are stalwart moderates so rubio is targeting a very different audience. >> you know what i'm wondering about the evangelical vote because it certainly isn't following evangelical patterns. >> right. >> when very prominent evangelical and i'll throw sarah palin in the mix, she endorsed donald trump. jerry falwell jr. backs donald trump, many others. and i'm wondering whether that shows either that group of voters is looking at other things, not just religiously focused, or there's a big shift going on here. what do you think? >> i think there is a shift going on. if i had predicted anything it would be that with any block of voters i didn't think trump would do particularly well with evangelicals. he has disproven that because of
those endorsements. i believe he has very, very effectively split the evangelical vote so far with ted cruz and there are others vying for it including huckabee especially and carson. so i believe there is some sort of shift going on -- >> by the way, you mentioned an interesting point here. that crowd -- i don't mean to demean them saying crowd. if you have huckabee, santorum, ben carson, ted cruz, they're all appealing to that evangelical vote assuming it's a block that it was once deemed to be, you could make a case where rubio or someone else runs up the middle or even a chris christie or jeb bush. >> it is going to be split. if these endorsements mean anything it's absolutely going to be split. >> it doesn't take much in a state like iowa. even if a record 150,000, 160,000 vote, you gcan have a winner with less than 40,000 votes. >> the model for campaigns is shattered. trump is waging a campaign that
is effectively a hostile takeover of the republican party. this week, to me, proves that. so all convention is out the door. i believe he's splitting that vote. i believe he's building a rather broad coalition. right or wrong, when he picks a fight or takes a stand like he did this week, i believe it's really about one thing. it's about drawing turnout on monday because if he were able to win iowa, he's really got a commanding lead in this race. so that evangelical vote is very interesting i think because santorum controlled it in 2012 it's very much split this time. >> well put. mark, thank you very much. we'll see and maybe get some signs in the debate tonight. by now you know what anniversary this is, 30 years ago where were you, the challenger explosion. but more importantly, what if i told you that that was the beginning of the end of the u.s. space program. i'll explain after this.
the enterprise, a symbol of our kompgering space, headed to new york to become a tourist attraction on a ship and everyone watched and everyone oohed and everyone aahed and everyone stopped what they were doing at the sight that was unfolding. i did not watch, i did not ooh, i did not aah. i didn't stop what i was doing. all did i was shake my head and wonder what our nation was becoming. this is mesmerizing? i thought about that as they were bother balling the last of the shuttles. on this, the 30th anniversary of the "challenger"er blowing up 30 years ago today.
today, clayton, my argument then was what it is now. i think that disaster was the beginning of the end. our zeal for space travel. that it becomes where we're taking it for granted and it was routine. a lot of people eager to shut it down and say what is it for? what is it worth? i think it started then. >> i would like to respectfully disagree. i'm hopeful that it is, not going away. >> i buy what you're saying and i want to see it turn around. i want to see it go back to the greatness when we were ooh'ing and aah'ing. we're largely hitching a ride with the russians to the space station. i know they're reusable rockets. i know they're billionaires,
trying to final gaps and bridge those gaps. i know we do very well in unmanned missions. do you think we'll ever get our big state programs back? >> i hope so. i believe the united states should be the pre eminent space faring nation. if you think back to orville and wilbur flying on the banks of kitty hawk. none of them imagined we would be able to homicide on a jet and fly from houston, texas, to abu dhabi. so my hope is that with commercialization of space flight. with things we're looking at in the future. the water discoveries on mars. the beautiful pictures of pollupluto. that these the things that will continue to push our space station and make it great. >> an unmanned space program? >> you have to have both. in my opinion it has to be a combination. the ability of the human to think and react and do things
based on what they're seeing in front of them is extremely important. but robotics is extremely important to keep us focus asked allow us to do thing more safely where we don't have to allow humans. so to me the future is a combination between continued human space flight and robotic space flight. >> do you think we need a big goal though? obviously, kennel has a goal of handling a man on the moon before the decade was out. we were competing with the then soviet union. it seemed like once we landed on the moon, again and again on the moon. then the apollo 13. we cut the program down, limited the "challenger" program, that we just didn't have any big goals. do we need big goals to follow that kennedy new frontier? >> i think it helps. most people see mars as that big goal. it is for boding, it is that far away. i'm not against going to mars
but i think we need to do in it steps. by going to the moon and putting a base there where humans begin to learn how they'll do the things they need to do to sustain themselves on the marsha martian surface. mars is a great goal. i hope we move to the moon with some intermediate steps so we can figure some things out. >> thank you. they are still a select few. ♪ lots of vitamins a&c, and, only 50 calories a serving... good morning, indeed. v8. veggies for all.
you. news breaks, history is made, things change, life as we know it today will not be the same tomorrow. so it's your choice, america. what are you going to do? >> hello, everybody. it's 5:00 in new york city and this is "the five." >> four days to the iowa caucuses and only four hours until the final debate before the first vote of election 2016. first at 7:00 p.m. eastern. four gop candidates will make their case to be the presidential nominee. then at 9:00 p.m. eastern, seven more will face off. who will come out on top tonight? ted cruz could be the biggest target with the highest poll numbers on the stage. and momentum building in the early states. he is feeling confident but still has this